Guns-to-work bill gets a bullseye
Just when it looked like the guns-to-work bill was going to sail through the Legislature, now it's up for target practice.
But in Senate Criminal Justice on Tuesday, Sen. Mike Bennett added a measure to give businesses immunity from lawsuits, if a shooting happens in their parking lots as a result of this bill.
The problem is, the amendment adds a new interest group trying to torpedo the bill: trial lawyers. The bill's next step is the Judiciary Committee, largely comprised of attorneys. As NRA spokeswoman Marion Hammer put it: "I don’t think it’s going to help the bill, I think it’s going to hurt it."
UPDATE! Bill passed with immunity for employers.


Sounds good. Suck it trial lawyers!
Posted by: | March 18, 2008 at 04:28 PM
They do cut into your bottom line, don't they, 4:28? Just like government regulations protecting the people from unscrupulous uncaring corporate greed.
Posted by: | March 18, 2008 at 04:35 PM
who does this bennett think he is??
when i wanna carry my pen.., er, gun, i wanna carry MY GUN!!
(signed)
goober
Posted by: | March 18, 2008 at 04:35 PM
And in the Diabolocal Plan set up by William Large and the Justice Reform Institute, the Gun Bill brings us INCREASED TORT REFORM!!!! I LOVE IT. Now what will Lori Weems and Manny Prieguez do? Will they represent their client the Trial Bar...or will they represent their client the AFL-CIO...
Posted by: Annie Oakley | March 18, 2008 at 04:50 PM
4:35 -
I am so glad you asked...
Actually, they don't cut into the bottom line. In the business world, we figure in the cost of stupid litigation, and, as such, i must simply pass this cost on to you, the consumer, in order to keep my profit margin the same.
Posted by: | March 18, 2008 at 04:55 PM
have some more koolaid, 4.55, if you believe the "cost of stupid litigation" impacts your bottom line.
instead, it is the irresponsible bidness people who would rather profit selling or providing UNsafe krap and insurance kriminals who would rather jack up rates instead of policing the aforesaid "bidness people", who they know to be irresponsible but still readily accept their premiums.
i wanna be around when you decide, like bobbie bork, to sue someone...hypocrite!!
Posted by: | March 18, 2008 at 05:00 PM
Right, that's what i said...they don't impact my bottom line because i pass this cost on to you in the form of higher prices.
Did you not understand?
Posted by: | March 18, 2008 at 05:04 PM
I like the bring your gun to work bill. How else is a young gun going to learn about what it's owner does for a living? How will it know what career opportunities are out there?
I suggest an amendment, however, since it's germane: on take your daughter to work day, allow parents to store their kids in a locked car.
Posted by: | March 18, 2008 at 05:17 PM
this makes perfect sense - if you're going to deny a business the right to setting polivy on its own private property, then you can't hold them culpapble for what may happen as a result.
Posted by: | March 18, 2008 at 05:30 PM
I bet 5:00 wears Nike shoes made in sweatshops and buys his detergent (if he even uses it) at Wal Mart, because its always the lowest prices...always.
Posted by: | March 18, 2008 at 05:31 PM
as long as those prices are dropping like a rock.
Posted by: | March 18, 2008 at 05:35 PM
Is there no limit to what the politicians who pander to the NRA will do?
Scum of the Earth and their in our legislature.
Posted by: | March 19, 2008 at 08:34 AM
Wow, lawyers in the Legislature actually voted to prevent their own kind from pursuing frivolous lawsuits? This must be a first in world history.
Posted by: | March 19, 2008 at 09:02 AM